| name | keep-current |
| description | Audits README.md, CLAUDE.md, and PROFILE.md against the actual state of the repo — skills, goals, and project direction — and proposes targeted updates. Also infers PROFILE.md refinements from the user's recent communication patterns and questions. Run periodically to keep docs in sync with the project. |
| argument-hint | [{"optional":"focus area"},"e.g. \"skills\" or \"profile\""] |
You are auditing the Claude resource library documentation to ensure it accurately reflects the current state of the project.
Step 1 — Gather current state
Use the Bash tool to collect everything needed:
echo "=SKILLS_ON_DISK="
ls ~/dev/claude/skills/
echo "=RECENT_COMMITS="
git -C ~/dev/claude log --oneline -20
echo "=RECENTLY_CHANGED="
git -C ~/dev/claude diff --name-only HEAD~10..HEAD 2>/dev/null
echo "=RECENT_POSTS="
ls -t ~/dev/www-andrewriley-info/content/post/2026/ 2>/dev/null | head -5
Then read the following files in parallel:
~/dev/claude/README.md~/dev/claude/CLAUDE.md~/dev/claude/PROFILE.md- Each
~/dev/claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md for every skill found on disk
Step 2 — Audit README.md and CLAUDE.md
Check each of the following against the actual repo state:
Skills table audit
- Are all skills in
skills/ listed in the README skills table and the CLAUDE.md skills quick reference?
- Are any skills listed in the docs but missing from disk?
- Are the descriptions accurate for each skill?
MCP server audit
- Do the MCP server sections reflect the actual registered servers and their configuration?
- Is the Claude Desktop section present and accurate?
Path conventions audit
- Do all documented paths still exist and match the repo structure?
General staleness
- Are there any sections that reference old approaches, removed features, or outdated commands?
- Does the repo structure diagram match
skills/ and scripts/ on disk?
Step 3 — Audit PROFILE.md
Review the PROFILE.md against evidence of Andrew's actual communication style from:
- Blog post topics and tone (infer from recent post slugs and session context)
- Skills built (what problems he cares enough about to automate)
- Questions asked in this session (what he reaches for, how he frames problems)
- MCP integrations in use (Splunk, HuggingFace, GitHub, Slack, Gmail, Calendar — infer focus areas)
Look for gaps or updates worth making:
- Missing focus areas (e.g. Splunk/observability now prominent)
- Outdated role description or technical focus
- Communication style traits not yet captured
- Tools or workflows now central to his practice
Do NOT fabricate traits — only propose updates supported by observable evidence from the repo and session.
Step 4 — Present proposed changes
For each document, present a clear diff-style summary of what you propose to change and why:
README.md
Proposed changes:
CLAUDE.md
Proposed changes:
PROFILE.md
Proposed changes:
No changes needed:
<section> — already accurate
If nothing needs updating in a document, say so explicitly. Do not propose changes for the sake of it.
Step 5 — Confirm and apply
Use the AskUserQuestion tool to ask:
Here are the proposed updates across README.md, CLAUDE.md, and PROFILE.md.
How would you like to proceed?
Options:
- Apply all — apply every proposed change
- Review each — walk through each change one at a time for approval
- Apply docs only (skip PROFILE.md) — apply README/CLAUDE changes, leave PROFILE untouched
- Cancel — make no changes
Step 6 — Apply approved changes
For each approved change, use the Edit tool to make the update precisely — no rewrites of surrounding content.
After all edits are applied, run:
cd ~/dev/claude
git add README.md CLAUDE.md PROFILE.md
git status
Show the user what is staged, then ask:
Changes staged. Commit and push to dev?
If confirmed:
cd ~/dev/claude && git commit -m "docs: keep-current audit — sync skills, MCP config, and profile updates" && git push
Tell the user what was updated and suggest running /repo-status to check overall sync state.
